3 ms·
Let me present a counter-opinion. I found KiCad to be surprisingly useful, not for super-complex boards, but for significantly more than just the simplest of pr
by jwr 10y ago
Let me present a counter-opinion. I found KiCad to be surprisingly useful, not for super-complex boards, but for significantly more than just the simplest of projects (I'm using it for four-layer boards with controlled impedance tracks and differential pairs).
Yes, there are bugs and annoyances. But not enough to shell out 6kEUR or so for the next step up in EDA tools (which would be Altium Designer, and I'm not even mentioning the maintenance fees, just the initial payment). For our business it simply doesn't make sense to spend that money given how well KiCad does its job.
Going into details — I only use the OpenGL mode, ever (because of the push&shove router). These are the things I would like fixed/improved:
— copper plane handling: copper planes from different nets do not avoid each other, which should be considered a bug,
— push&shove router will happily push around my carefully placed differential pairs, breaking their alignment, and NOT TELL ME ABOUT IT (the last part is the worst),
— DRC doesn't check diff pairs,
— I'd like to see easier via stitching.
The rest are inconveniences, which every CAD package has.
Also, most of this discussion focuses on PCB design. It is worth mentioning that the schematic drawing is pretty well done, and the resulting schematics look good. Also, the idea of associating footprints separately from schematic symbols is a very good one and lets me reuse footprints better.
Overall, I found KiCad to be perfectly suitable for nearly all hobby projects, and very capable for professional work, although with some caveats, and not for everything out there. I think I would not try to use it to route high-speed boards with more than 6 layers.
Let's also look at this from a different perspective: these days, as a hobbyist, I can simply start DOING electronics and easily get to 4-layer controlled impedance designs. Given the wonderful chips that are available these days and the availability of services like OSHpark and OSHstencils, this means you can really do impressive stuff, without spending anything on EDA tools. The upfront start-up cost is zero. This is fantastic and is a great achievement of the KiCad team. I am very grateful for that.
- adwn 10y agoI basically agree with everything you said, and I don't think we contradict each other. If I were to start an electronics company today, I would almost certainly choose KiCad and use it until I had some serious revenue. But if demanding electronics are your bread and butter and you have several million Euro revenue per year, saving a couple thousand Euro in license fees by not having a professional EDA tool is hard to justify. KiCad just isn't there yet, though it might be in a few years.
- dfox 10y agoProbably my biggest annoyance with OpenGL mode is that it completely changes the UI logic form standard mode (arguably it makes the interface more Windows-like, or probably Altium-like). The standard mode UI is weird but surprisingly usable so I tend to do most of the layout work in standard mode and only switch to OpenGL to use push-and-shove to avoid major ripup-and-reroute cases and for diff-pairs/length matching.
- jwr 10y agoWhat do you need the standard mode for? Serious question — I actually never used it, I only stay in OpenGL mode, so I don't know what I'm missing?
- uola 10y ago> But not enough to shell out 6kEUR or so for the next step up in EDA tools (which would be Altium Designer, and I'm not even mentioning the maintenance fees, just the initial payment). These days Altium have both CircuitMaker, which is free with limitations, and CircuitStudio which is like 900€.